Impacts of Traffic Noise and Traffic Volume on Birds of Roadside Habitats
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright © 2009 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. Parris, K. M., and A. Schneider 2008. Impacts of traffic noise and traffic volume on birds of roadside habitats. Ecology and Society 14(1): 29. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art29/ Research, part of a Special Feature on Effects of Roads and Traffic on Wildlife Populations and Landscape Function Impacts of Traffic Noise and Traffic Volume on Birds of Roadside Habitats Kirsten M. Parris 1,2 and Angela Schneider 3 ABSTRACT. Roadside habitats are important for a range of taxa including plants, insects, mammals, and birds, particularly in developed countries in which large expanses of native vegetation have been cleared for agriculture or urban development. Although roadside vegetation may provide suitable habitat for many species, resident animals can be exposed to high levels of traffic noise, visual disturbance from passing vehicles, and the risk of collision with cars and trucks. Traffic noise can reduce the distance over which acoustic signals such as song can be detected, an effect known as acoustic interference or masking. Studies from the northern hemisphere show that the singing behavior of birds changes in the presence of traffic noise. We investigated the impact of traffic noise and traffic volume on two species of birds, the Grey Shrike-thrush (Colluricincla harmonica) and the Grey Fantail (Rhipidura fuliginosa), at 58 roadside sites on the Mornington Peninsula, southeastern Australia. The lower singing Grey Shrike-thrush sang at a higher frequency in the presence of traffic noise, with a predicted increase in dominant frequency of 5.8 Hz/dB of traffic noise, and a total effect size of 209 Hz. In contrast, the higher singing Grey Fantail did not appear to change its song in traffic noise. The probability of detecting each species on a visit to a site declined substantially with increasing traffic noise and traffic volume, with several lines of evidence supporting a larger effect of traffic noise. Traffic noise could hamper detection of song by conspecifics, making it more difficult for birds to establish and maintain territories, attract mates and maintain pair bonds, and possibly leading to reduced breeding success in noisy roadside habitats. Closing key roads during the breeding season is a potential, but untested, management strategy to protect threatened bird species from traffic noise and collision with vehicles at the time of year when they are most vulnerable to their impacts. Other management options include reducing the speed and/or volume of traffic on such roads to an acceptably low level. Ours is the first study to investigate the effect of traffic noise on the singing behavior of birds in the southern hemisphere. Key Words: acoustic interference; ambient noise; bioacoustics; conservation biology; road ecology; signal design; traffic noise; vocal communication. INTRODUCTION mammals communicate via acoustic signals. Birds use calls and songs to attract and bond with mates, Interest in the ecological effects of roads and the defend territories from rivals, maintain contact with traffic they carry has increased over the past two social groups, beg for food, and warn of danger from decades (Forman and Alexander 1998, Trombulak approaching predators (Collins 2004, Marler 2004). and Frissell 2000, Forman et al. 2003, Slabbekoorn Acoustic interference, also known as masking, and Ripmeester 2008). These effects include the loss occurs when background noise reduces the distance and fragmentation of habitat, injury and death of over which a signal can be heard (the active space; wildlife attempting to cross roads, pollution of air, Marten and Marler 1977). Birds use a variety of water, and soil, and constraints on acoustic strategies to maximize the active space of their communication in areas affected by traffic noise. signals in naturally noisy habitats (Brumm and Many animals including insects, frogs, birds, and Slabbekoorn 2005). However, those that live near 1School of Botany, University of Melbourne, Australia, 2Australian Research Centre for Urban Ecology, Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne, Australia, 3Department of Zoology, University of Melbourne, Australia Ecology and Society 14(1): 29 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art29/ roads must also compete with traffic noise, much of roadside areas for foraging and/or nesting, or which occurs in the low-frequency bands below reduced breeding success. Because both the level of 2000 Hz (Patricelli and Blickley 2006, Warren et traffic noise and the frequency of visual disturbance al. 2006). Because energy in the spectral region of from passing vehicles increase with traffic volume, an acoustic signal contributes more to masking than their effects are difficult to separate. However, does energy remote from the signal (Egan and Hake Reijnen et al. (1995) controlled for the visibility of 1950), low-frequency signals are expected to suffer cars in their analysis of bird densities in woodland greater acoustic interference from traffic noise than habitats adjacent to and distant from roads, and are high-frequency signals. concluded that traffic noise had a greater effect on bird densities than did visual disturbance. Most research to date on the impact of traffic noise on wildlife has focused on birds in the northern During the agricultural expansion of Australia, vast hemisphere (but see Sun and Narins 2005, Bee and areas of native forest and woodland were cleared Swanson 2007). A range of behavioral responses to for pasture and crops. In many rural landscapes, urban noise has been observed, including singing at much of the remnant vegetation is confined to a higher frequency (pitch), thereby reducing narrow strips on public road reserves, forming a acoustic interference from the low-frequency noise network of native habitat (Bennett 1991). Road (a frequency shift; Slabbekoorn and Peet 2003, reserves cover 567,000 ha (2.5%) of the state of Fernández-Juricic et al. 2005, Slabbekoorn and den Victoria (Land Conservation Council 1988). They Boer-Visser 2006, Wood and Yezerinac 2006); provide important habitat for many species of plants singing more loudly (an amplitude shift; Brumm and animals, including the threatened Grey- 2004); and changing diurnal singing patterns to crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis), avoid peak traffic periods (a temporal shift; Fuller Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis), and Brush- et al. 2007). Traffic noise may also affect bird tailed Phascogale (Phascogale tapaotafa)(Adam populations and communities (Katti and Warren and Robinson 1996, van der Ree 2002, van der Ree 2004). Reijnen et al. (1995, 1996) suggested that the et al. 2006). A recent study of bird communities of lower population densities of birds in habitats close roadside remnants on the Mornington Peninsula, to roads in The Netherlands were caused by traffic Victoria recorded 39 native species across eight noise, although these results may be confounded transects (Antos and White 2004). Similarly, with other differences among the noisy roadside roadsides provide valuable habitat for plants, sites and the quieter control sites away from roads. insects, birds, and mammals in the USA, UK, and Traffic noise was also proposed as the primary cause Europe (Way 1977, Munguira and Thomas 1992, of reduced breeding success in Willow Warblers Bellamy et al. 2000, Saarinen 2005, Shochat et al. (Phylloscopus trochilus) with territories close to 2005). The use of roadside habitats by animals that busy roads; the males had difficulty attracting and communicate using acoustic signals, such as birds, maintaining a mate (Reijnen and Foppen 1994). presents an interesting trade-off between the Rheindt (2003) hypothesized that birds with low- presence of suitable habitat and the potentially frequency calls or songs would be less abundant at detrimental effects of traffic noise and passing sites with high levels of traffic noise because they vehicles on survival rates, maintenance of would experience greater acoustic interference from territories, attraction of mates, and breeding success low-frequency noise. In an unreplicated study, (Mumme et al. 2000, Warren et al. 2006). Rheindt (2003) found some evidence that species with lower frequency signals were less abundant in In this study, we assessed the impacts of traffic noise noisy sites than they were in quiet sites. and traffic volume on birds in narrow roadside strips of vegetation (road verges) in southern Australia Traffic volume and the number of vehicles traveling using two target species; the Grey Shrike-thrush on an adjacent road could also affect birds in (Colluricincla harmonica; Pachycephalidae) and roadside habitats. The probability of a fatal collision the Grey Fantail (Rhipidura fuliginosa; Dicruridae). with a vehicle is likely to increase with traffic Both species are common, sedentary, and dependent volume (Clevenger et al. 2003), as will visual on forest, woodland, or shrubland (Higgins and disturbance by passing cars and trucks. The impact Peter 2002, Higgins et al. 2006); thus, individuals of visual disturbance from passing vehicles on that inhabit roadsides are expected to experience habitat suitability for birds is poorly understood traffic noise and other disturbances from the (Goosem 2007), but could include avoidance of adjacent road throughout the year. The two target Ecology and Society 14(1): 29 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art29/ species communicate using different parts of